Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Username: Password:
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 9

Author Topic: Global warming, climate change? Article  (Read 32460 times)

Pinehouse4

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
  • OWF Brand: Portage and Main
  • OWF Model: BL 34/44
  • .
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #75 on: March 29, 2014, 09:33:41 PM »

You put it perfectly Sloppy, and used his own words to show that.

Never-the-less I am sure we will see some more charts and data soon enough.

On a side note.

I have noticed that I have not seen any advertising by General Motors on the Chevy Volt lately.

Now I recall that when your Congress and my Federal government were heavily invested to the tune of ( brace yourself Slimjim ) billions of tax payer dollars in keeping them afloat that was promoted as the car of the future, a greener future using electricity instead of gasoline, that dreaded fuel that comes from oil.

Now GM seems to be quite proud of their 450 odd horsepower Cadillac. See a lot of that advertised. What an about face they have made.

Why would they do that?

In 45 years of driving various vehicles I have never had anything with that kind of power.

Bob



Logged
Stihl 028
Stihl 046
Wallenstien 820 wood processor
JD 6300 4 WD loader, blade, blower, forks,
BL 34/44 working great.

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #76 on: March 30, 2014, 04:54:47 AM »

That's all well and good, but the length of existence of the planet doesn't prove or disprove man's present impact on the present climate.  The two things are not mutually inclusive, nor are they exclusive.  Neal

Agreed Neal.... and your response further proves my point:  global warming is theory with some data that supports it,,, and a good portion that does not actually. 

In difference to your previous statement

Global warming is happening it is proven fact.

....global warming is anything but "proven fact."  You may certainly disagree and buy into the global warming theory but you or I may or may simply not be alivelong enough to see the normal oscillation of sea levels down, additional ice formation at the polar caps, decreased global temperatures when global cooling occurs.  Perhaps there will be EPA regulations requiring increased production of CO2 emissions.  :-\  Something to think about.

If you believe in global warming, you certainly must believe in the mutually inclusive possibility of global cooling.... it might just be what the next 254 years has in store for the planet.  We just haven't personally experienced it due to our limited life span expectancy and the fact that accurate temperature measuring devices did not exist really until the 17th century.  ;)

I fully encourage you to believe whatever you choose to believe but please present your argument as "... this data supports (whatever the data supports; e.g. increased global temperature)" but please note that global warming is a theory, not a fact.
For a scientist you don't seem to understand the scientific method. 

A theory (in the scientific sense we are speaking of) is a valid explanation of fact and measurement.  The theory is not supported simply by "some" data, but all of it.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, however if it is a theory (and global warming is indeed a valid scientific theory), it has yet to have any evidence that proves it false, or that disagrees with it.  Surely you would wish to correct yourself if you claim to be a scientist...

If you have any evidence that shows the planet was not warming over the past 200 years I (along with many others) would love to see it. 

Global warming is indeed a proven theory, supported by factual data (over the 200 year time period originally mentioned).  Again, if you have any evidence or data to the contrary I, and many others would love to see it.  I have provided mine.

In this case I choose to believe the data, and the theory that is supported by the data.  It's that simple. 

Neal



Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #77 on: March 30, 2014, 04:57:32 AM »

You put it perfectly Sloppy, and used his own words to show that.

Never-the-less I am sure we will see some more charts and data soon enough.

On a side note.

I have noticed that I have not seen any advertising by General Motors on the Chevy Volt lately.

Now I recall that when your Congress and my Federal government were heavily invested to the tune of ( brace yourself Slimjim ) billions of tax payer dollars in keeping them afloat that was promoted as the car of the future, a greener future using electricity instead of gasoline, that dreaded fuel that comes from oil.

Now GM seems to be quite proud of their 450 odd horsepower Cadillac. See a lot of that advertised. What an about face they have made.

Why would they do that?

In 45 years of driving various vehicles I have never had anything with that kind of power.

Bob
Ya, keep those pesky data and facts away from you!!!!   ::)

Neal
Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

slimjim

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
  • OWF Brand: Wood Doctor / HeatMaster
  • OWF Model: 14,000. / G 200 and G 400
  • Southern Maine
    • View Profile
    • www.mainlycustom.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #78 on: March 30, 2014, 05:25:04 AM »

I have owned GM products all my adult life, NO MORE, I already supported them , they mismanaged that support then stole my taxpayer dollar to prop themselves up again, never again, FORD or TOYOTA for me thanks.
Logged
Wood boiler sales, service and installation for the Northeastern USA.

Sloppy_Snood

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 511
  • OWF Brand: Portage & Main
  • OWF Model: BL 34-44 Shaker
  • "Welcome to second place." - Steve Conover
    • View Profile
    • Indian Creek Shooting Systems
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #79 on: March 30, 2014, 05:45:39 AM »

For a scientist you don't seem to understand the scientific method.

Not to toot my own horn too loudly, the review panels of the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) and Tetrahedron Letters might disagree with you quite a bit... they seem to like what I've researched and written on organic superconductor materials.  ;)  I have lived the scientific method for 40 plus years thank you... I understand clearly what it is (but more importantly, what it is not ;) ).

Per a general definition from Wikipedia,

Theory is a group of ideas meant to explain a certain topic of science, such as a single or collection of fact(s), event(s), or phenomen(a)(on). Typically, a theory is developed through the use of contemplative and rational forms of abstract and generalized thinking.

I bolded the word "or" in the definition not to disagree or correct with you.... rather, to point out that "theory" can also be called "group of ideas" and "a collection of events or phenomena."  This is important because many global warming theories are indeed that:  theories based on a group of ideas as a collection of events/phenomena. 

In my line of scientific critical thinking, the err of your use of the word "theory" occurred when you Googled up and read the global warming theory you choose to believe and assert that these are definitively now "facts."  That may or may not be true but we can leave it to the current American media to purport that the theories are indeed fact.

A theory (in the scientific sense we are speaking of) is a valid explanation of fact and measurement.  The theory is not supported simply by "some" data, but all of it.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, however if it is a theory (and global warming is indeed a valid scientific theory), it has yet to have any evidence that proves it false, or that disagrees with it.  Surely you would wish to correct yourself if you claim to be a scientist...

It would seem to me you missed my point.  :-\   For your argument, you seem to agree with the data collected in the last couple hundred years.  That's fine.... but it is indeed limited data for a VERY short period of time of the theorized 4.5 billion year old age of planet earth.  Again, you choose to believe those scientific opinions and data that support your belief based on events, phenomena, and some data for an incredibly short period of the earth's life cycle.  I do not.   Pretty simple really.  Much like seasonal variation, rising and lower sea levels, etc., I choose to believe that the minute temperature fluctuation of the planet is merely a short time period of normal global temperature variance that will be offset in net effect by global cooling in the years ahead (that most likely will occur beyond my lifetime; much like it most probably did in the previous 4,499,999,746 years predating Industrial Revolution).

If you have any evidence that shows the planet was not warming over the past 200 years I (along with many others) would love to see it.  Global warming is indeed a proven theory, supported by factual data (over the 200 year time period originally mentioned).  Again, if you have any evidence or data to the contrary I, and many others would love to see it.  I have provided mine.  In this case I choose to believe the data, and the theory that is supported by the data.  It's that simple.  Neal

You seem to be quite adept with Google so I am surprised to see that you cannot find theories or data that do not support your belief in the theory of global warming.  There is a rather large consortium of highly respected, scientists (400+ if memory serves me) that clearly disagree with the theory in general but not surprisingly, the media doesn't seem too interested in reporting on it objectively.  As you can see, scientific methodology is anything but infallible as scientists on both sides of the global warming topic exists.... the non-believers seem to be mutually excluded in large part.  I'll dig up some nice information for you in the future though (a bit busy right now putting in my Indiana-warming OWB... ;-) ).  -Scott
« Last Edit: March 30, 2014, 05:51:57 AM by Sloppy_Snood »
Logged
NWP 49mm Short Block-modified Stihl 029 Farm Boss
Harbor Freight 20-ton Dual-Direction Log Splitter
2006 Chevy 2500 3/4-ton 2WD
New Holland TC33D 4WD

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #80 on: March 30, 2014, 05:50:13 AM »

I have owned GM products all my adult life, NO MORE, I already supported them , they mismanaged that support then stole my taxpayer dollar to prop themselves up again, never again, FORD or TOYOTA for me thanks.
Both of those have also been given vast amounts of taxpayer dollars in loans though.

Neal
Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

slimjim

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
  • OWF Brand: Wood Doctor / HeatMaster
  • OWF Model: 14,000. / G 200 and G 400
  • Southern Maine
    • View Profile
    • www.mainlycustom.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #81 on: March 30, 2014, 06:07:50 AM »

Really Neal, I'm not sure where, could you please explain, I'm not talking about a tax break to open a new plant, I'm talking about the legalized theft of my money to BAIL OUT an irresponsible corporation, I would be happy to see proof of Toyota or Ford accepting money from the BAIL OUT, we obviously disagree on several fronts, the largest to me is how can you justify the increases in the size of govt. Look at the TSA, do you actually feel safer in the skies with TSA on the job, How do you feel about Social security, Obamacare, seatbelts, and helmet laws, personally I think they are ALL bullsheet, I guess Venezuela and Cuba are doing great with there socialist govt's in your view correct. Why is it such a crime in the socialists mind to wish to think and do for yourself and then be responsible for your own actions, in other words if you choose to believe in Global warming and wish to do something about it then by all means do it, just don't steal my money to promote your agenda.
Logged
Wood boiler sales, service and installation for the Northeastern USA.

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #82 on: March 30, 2014, 06:16:33 AM »

For a scientist you don't seem to understand the scientific method.
Per a general definition from Wikipedia,

Theory is a group of ideas meant to explain a certain topic of science, such as a single or collection of fact(s), event(s), or phenomen(a)(on). Typically, a theory is developed through the use of contemplative and rational forms of abstract and generalized thinking.

I bolded the word "or" in the definition not to disagree or correct with you.... rather, to point out that "theory" can also be called "group of ideas" and "a collection of events or phenomena."  This is important because many global warming theories are indeed that:  theories based on a group of ideas as a collection of events/phenomena. 

We are in agreement thus far.

The theory of global warming is thus: over the past 200 years the planet has increased in temperature. 

This phenomena is indeed explained by facts, and is falsifiable (yet to be done).   

You stated that there was ample evidence that proved the theory incorrect.  I asked you to produce said evidence as you said it existed.


In my line of scientific critical thinking, the err of your use of the word "theory" occurred when you Googled up and read the global warming theory you choose to believe and assert that these are definitively now "facts."  That may or may not be true but we can leave it to the current American media to purport that the theories are indeed fact.
Utter nonsense. 

I have done my own research utilizing data to back up the theory.  This data is factual, and I presented it previously (charts and link(s)).

Again, I choose to believe the data, which is used to support the theory that the planet has warmed.  If you have evidence or data to the contrary I'd be more than willing to look at it.  I remain, however, skeptical.  Show me, as I have shown you.

It would seem to me you missed my point.  :-\   For your argument, you seem to agree with the data collected in the last couple hundred years.  That's fine.... but it is indeed limited data for a VERY short period of time of the theorized 4.5 billion year old age of planet earth.  Again, you choose to believe those scientific opinions and data that support your belief based on events, phenomena, and some data for an incredibly short period of the earth's life cycle.  I do not.   Pretty simple really.
Show me the data that contradicts the theory that the planet has warmed over the last 200 years.  I am more than willing to change my position if you can provide some data that shows the planet has not warmed, and that the previously known data that shows warming is incorrect.

The age of the planet is irrelevant to the present topic.  However short the last couple of hundred years is in comparison to the age of the earth does not change the data that has been gathered over the short time period.  Nor does the age of the planet have any bearing on the theory that the planet has warmed over the past 200 years.  Pretty simple really.

You seem to be quite adept with Google so I am surprised to see that you cannot find theories or data that do not support your belief in the theory of global warming.  There is a rather large consortium of highly respected, scientists (400+ if memory serves me) that clearly disagree with the theory in general but not surprisingly, the media doesn't seem too interested in reporting on it objectively.  As you can see, scientific methodology is anything but infallible as scientists on both sides of the global warming topic exists.... the non-believers seem to be mutually excluded in large part.  I'll dig up some nice information for you in the future though (a bit busy right now putting in my Indiana-warming OWB... ;-) ).  -Scott

My ability to utilize Google is irrelevant, however Googling the earth temperature history does not show any data to the contrary of the what I have presented, nor anything that you have promoted to exist.

I look forward to that future and data.   :thumbup:

Neal
Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

skorpyd

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 98
  • OWF Brand: Home Built
  • OWF Model: Code name "Woody"
    • View Profile
Logged

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #84 on: March 30, 2014, 06:42:19 AM »

Really Neal, I'm not sure where, could you please explain, I'm not talking about a tax break to open a new plant, I'm talking about the legalized theft of my money to BAIL OUT an irresponsible corporation, I would be happy to see proof of Toyota or Ford accepting money from the BAIL OUT, we obviously disagree on several fronts, the largest to me is how can you justify the increases in the size of govt. Look at the TSA, do you actually feel safer in the skies with TSA on the job, How do you feel about Social security, Obamacare, seatbelts, and helmet laws, personally I think they are ALL bullsheet, I guess Venezuela and Cuba are doing great with there socialist govt's in your view correct. Why is it such a crime in the socialists mind to wish to think and do for yourself and then be responsible for your own actions, in other words if you choose to believe in Global warming and wish to do something about it then by all means do it, just don't steal my money to promote your agenda.
It is quite well known that Ford and Toyota (to a lesser degree) have been given federally guaranteed loans in the past not part of the bail out, nor did I say that those loans were part of that.

Ford took loans in 2009 and did back and request to be part of the bail out if necessary (it wasn't however):
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/ford-motor-co-does-u-turn-on-bailouts/

Toyota:
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2010/12/report-ford-took-federal-funds-too.html

As for the bailout in general I am opposed to any portion of it that gave money away without the expectation of repayment.  I am more lenient on the government loaning (with full principle and interest to be repaid) in a timely manner.  This was not done with GM for example, the taxpayers lost about 10 billion or so on bailing out GM.  I think an option could have been put in place to guarantee repayment, sadly it was not done.

Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 

I am all for smaller overall government, I think it is plainly absurd how large our government has become.  That said, I am all for large reductions in military, and social programs, while expanding education and sciences (NASA, NSF, ect,).  The increases to those departments would not require the entire reduction from the previous.

I think that Social Security should be an opt in yearly (filed with tax return) program that is lockboxed. 

I think Obamacare is a giant mess that set us back in decades for a properly discussed and funded UHC program.  I am not a huge fan of either a private healthcare solution, nor a UHC solution, however it is quite apparent that we will need to have a UHC solution in the not so distant future.  I wish that we could take a few years to site down and work on a solution that is agreed upon by most.  Obamacare was nothing of this sort, and was simply a welfare program for health insurance companies. 

I think seatbelts and helmets should be a state government decision, however providing people who are stupid enough not to use either with a choice is questionable also...

A good/great government (state and federal) IMO is a fair mix of communism and democracy.  We need communistic ideals like sharing the burden for things like roads, schools, environmental protection (although the EPA is out of hand in many cases), education, and the like.  We need democracy as well to keep our motivations high, improvement comes though involvement, and aptitude, not being inept or ignorant.

Neal
Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #85 on: March 30, 2014, 06:47:24 AM »

Here's some data to look at.

http://www.wjr.com/common/page.php?pt=beckmannglobalwarming&id=1733&is_corp=0
Like half the links are 404ed now, and some are links to techno thriller (fiction) books.

This wasn't supposed to be any evidence to argue against the planet warming over the past 100 or 200 years, right?

Neal
Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

skorpyd

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 98
  • OWF Brand: Home Built
  • OWF Model: Code name "Woody"
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #86 on: March 30, 2014, 07:23:11 AM »

Didn't have time to go through all the links.

Let's stipulate that the planet is warming as in natural climate cycles.   That is still not "proof" we are causing it or that it's natural causes or what degree of each.
Logged

NaturallyAspirated

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
  • OWF Brand: Central Boiler
  • OWF Model: M250
  • Golfing, snowmobiling fool!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nealmastel.com
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #87 on: March 30, 2014, 07:56:54 AM »

Didn't have time to go through all the links.

Let's stipulate that the planet is warming as in natural climate cycles.   That is still not "proof" we are causing it or that it's natural causes or what degree of each.
It was never stipulated that it was only due to man.

Neal
Logged
Miss Farad was pretty and sensual, and charged to a reckless potential; but a rascal named Ohm conducted her home - Her decline was, alas, exponential
Send me your bitcoins!  1GEsGKzP5xK9e45YDjmRzGYpnhwT3oNbvj

mlappin

  • Fabricator Extraordinaire
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4140
  • OWF Brand: homebuilt, now HeatmasterSS
  • OWF Model: Martin Steel Works Gen 1 then, now a G200.
  • North Liberty, Indiana
    • View Profile
    • Altheatsolutions
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #88 on: March 30, 2014, 08:40:18 AM »




Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 



That caught me off guard, I can't see the two being the least bit compatible, if both belonged to the UFC it would be a cage match to the death.

Could you please explain in detail how a country could be fiscally conservative and still cater to the it ain't fair, throw some money at it till it's fixed crowd? Or how a country can be fiscally conservative and still cater to those that can't or won't take care of themselves and instead rely on my tax dollars to survive?
Logged
Stihl 023
Stihl 362
Stihl 460
Sachs Dolmar 112 and 120
Homemade skid steer mounted splitter, 30" throat, 5" cylinder
Wood-Eze model 8100 firewood processor

HeatmasterSS dealer for Northern Indiana

Homerglide

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
  • OWF Brand: Orlan EKO
  • OWF Model: Out in the shop - Model 25 gasifier
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
« Reply #89 on: March 30, 2014, 09:34:05 AM »

Two points to state:

1. Don't you boys look tough gangbanging one individual. Is that the honorable thing to do?

2. Silly how a person gets upset over a dollar spent researching global warming but doesn't squeak a dirty word about all the DOLLARS spent in search of weapons of mass destruction that the intelligence community said did not exist...........................

Even if our industrialization isn't the reason for the ice caps melting away, shouldn't we determine what is going on in our house (the planet Earth)? If your basement or crawl space began smelling bad and moisture was becoming evident, wouldn't you investigate in order to fix the problem?

It is sad that people are losing their objectivity for the benefit of political party rhetoric. When I was a boy back in the 60's I volunteered to hand out flyers in support of a candidate in an upcoming presidential election. An elderly gentleman spent some time discussing various political issues with me (just a kid). This was a time of solid cold war with Russia. Anyway, a statement he made has been with me ever since. He said, "Kid, we won't need to worry about foreign powers defeating us, our defeat will come from within.

You see this very thing happening right now in DC. Who is to blame for dividing Americans? Do ya think our present congress is doing anything near just? Whoever has anything to gain from a divided America, IS NOT A LOYAL PATRIOT.

Someone has an agenda to take this country down from within. Who would gain from that? who would gain power over others in a societal downfall? A poor family in Appalachia? A recent immigrant family from Vietnam? A tree hugger? A plumber from Vermont? A conglomerate of corporations? Lawyers?

Do you want to help with that agenda or be independent minded.
Logged
Coupla Chainsaws
Axe
Strong OLD Back
2000 Dodge Cummins
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 9